DOCSLIB.ORG

Casenotes: Maritime Law—Land-Based Negligence

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Casenotes: Maritime Law—Land-Based Negligence University of Baltimore Law Review Volume 11 Article 6 Issue 2 Winter 1982 1982 Casenotes: Maritime Law — Land-Based Negligence Standard of Care Established in a Longshoreman's Third Party Action against Vessel Owner Under the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act of 1972. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. v. Santos, 451 U.S. 156 (1981) Julia C. Neal University of Baltimore School of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/ublr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Neal, Julia C. (1982) "Casenotes: Maritime Law — Land-Based Negligence Standard of Care Established in a Longshoreman's Third Party Action against Vessel Owner Under the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act of 1972. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. v. Santos, 451 U.S. 156 (1981)," University of Baltimore Law Review: Vol. 11: Iss. 2, Article 6. Available at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/ublr/vol11/iss2/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Baltimore Law Review by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CASENOTES MARITIME LAW - LAND-BASED NEGLIGENCE STANDARD OF CARE ESTABLISHED IN A LONGSHOREMAN'S THIRD PARTY ACTION AGAINST VESSEL OWNER UNDER THE LONGSHOREMEN'S AND HARBOR WORKERS' COMPENSA- TION ACT OF 1972. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. v. Santos, 451 U.S. 156 (1981). I. INTRODUCTION The 1972 amendments to the Longshoremen's and Harbor Work- ers' Compensation Act (LHWCA)' limited an injured longshoreman's cause of action against a vessel owner to negligence.' However, these amendments failed to state the standard of care required of the vessel owner.' Consequently, the federal courts have struggled with establish- ing the proper standard of care that is to be applied in a longshore- man's third party negligence action against a vessel owner.4 In Scindia Steam Navigation Co. v. Santosi the Supreme Court held that a vessel owner has no general duty to discover dangerous conditions that de- velop within the confines of the operations assigned to the stevedore.6 However, where the dangerous condition becomes known to the vessel owner, he will under certain circumstances have a duty to act when the dangerous condition arises from the malfunctioning of the vessel's gear 1. Act of Oct. 27, 1972, Pub. L. No. 92-576, 86 Stat. 1251 (amending 33 U.S.C. §§ 901-950 (1970)). 2. 33 U.S.C. § 905(b) (1976). Section 905(b) of the Act provides: In the event of injury to a person covered under this chapter caused by the negligence of a vessel, then such person, or anyone otherwise enti- tled to recover damages by reason thereof, may bring an action against such vessel as a third party in accordance with the provisions of Section 933 of this title, and the employer shall not be liable to the vessel for such damages directly or indirectly and any agreements or warranties to the contrary shall be void. If such person was employed by the vessel to provide stevedoring services, no such action shall be permitted if the in- jury was caused by the negligence of persons engaged in providing steve- doring services to the vessel. If such person was employed by the vessel to provide ship building or repair services, no such action shall be per- mitted if the injury was caused by the negligence of persons engaged in providing ship building or repair services to the vessel. The liability of the vessel under this subsection shall not be based upon the warranty of seaworthiness or a breach thereof at the time the injury occurred. The remedy provided in this subsection shall be exclusive of all other reme- dies against the vessel except remedies available under this chapter. 3. See id 4. See, e.g., Comment, Shiowner Liability Under Section 905(b) of the Longshore- men's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act." A ProposedStandard of Care, 9 FORDHAM URB. L.J. 323 (1980); Comment, Negligence Standards Under the 1972 Amendments to the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act: Ex- amining the Viewpoints, 21 VILL. L. REV. 244 (1976). 5. 451 U.S. 156 (1981). 6. Id at 172. A stevedore is one who is responsible for unloading a ship in port. WEBSTER'S SEVENTH NEW COLLEGIATE DICTIONARY 860 (1965). 19821 Scindia Steam Navigation Co. v. Santos 333 being used in the stevedore operations.7 This casenote examines the standards of care adopted by the federal circuit courts, analyzes Scindia in light of those standards, and evaluates the impact this decision will have on future negligence actions brought under the LHWCA.8 II. THE FACTUAL BACKGROUND Santos, a longshoreman and employee of the Seattle Stevedore Company, was injured while loading a vessel owned by Scindia Steam Navigation Company. 9 On the day of the accident, his task was to re- move sacks of wheat from a pallet board' 0 that was lowered into the hatch by a winch" and then properly stow the sacks of wheat."2 The winch that was being used, which was part of the ship's gear, was mal- functioning to the extent that when the brakes were applied, it would not come to a complete stop.' 3 The accident which caused Santos' inju- ries occurred when a pallet board failed to stop until it hit a pallet jack,' 4 spilling half the sacks of wheat from the pallet.'5 The hatch tender, believing the remaining sacks were secure enough not to fall, ordered the winch operator to raise the pallet about fifteen feet. Santos and three other longshoremen were permitted to clear away the spilled sacks. A few minutes later, more sacks fell from the pallet, striking and injuring Santos. 6 Santos instituted a third party action against Scindia Steam Navi- gation Company for negligence pursuant to section 905(b) of the 7. 451 U.S. 156, 175-76 (1981). 8. 33 U.S.C. § 905(b) (1976). 9. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. v. Santos, 451 U.S. 156, 158 (1981). 10. A pallet is "a portable platform of wood or other material for handling, storage, or movement of materials and packages in warehouses, factories, or vehicles." WEB- STER'S SEVENTH NEW COLLEGIATE DICTIONARY 606 (1965). 11. A winch is "a powerful machine with one or more drums on which to coil a rope, cable or chain for hauling or hoisting." Id at 1022. 12. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. v. Santos, 451 U.S. 156, 160 (1981). 13. Santos' accident occurred on December 10, 1972. The winch driver had com- plained to his foreman on December 8th that the brakes were not holding on the winches; instead, they would travel several more feet before the brakes could stop the descent of the load. Brief for Respondent at 4-7, Scindia Steam Navigation Co. v. Santos, 451 U.S. 156 (1981). 14. "A pallet jack is a small, wheeled, cartlike vehicle with prongs on the front like a forklift with which the longshoremen in the hold would cart the pallet load to the wings of the hold where they would then remove the sacks and stow them by hand." Scindia Steam Navigation Co. v. Santos, 451 U.S. 156, 160 (1981). 15. Id 16. Id Three sacks struck Santos, one hitting him in the back of the neck. Brief for Respondent at 6, Scindia Steam Navigation Co. v. Santos, 451 U.S. 156 (1981). There was some disagreement as to whether the additional sacks fell because of the braking mechanism allowing the suspended pallet to slip a few times, work- ing loose the additional sacks that fell, or whether the additional sacks fell because the pallet board was swinging back and forth. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. v. Santos, 451 U.S. 156, 160 (1981). Baltimore Law Review [Vol. II LHWCA. 17 The United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, applying the Restatement standard, 18 held that there was no genuine issue as to any material facts and entered judgment in favor of Scindia Steam Navigation Company. 9 The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, reversing the district court, held that the controlling standard for actions brought under section 905(b) is a "reasonable care under the circumstances approach."2 Under this view, the court of appeals found that there 21 were material facts in dis- pute that were to be resolved by a jury. III. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND A. The Early Development For many years, the longshoremen's work of unloading and load- ing vessels was treated as a non-maritime activity.22 But in 1914, the Supreme Court announced that actions by longshoremen against steve- dores for injuries were to be subject to admiralty jurisdiction.23 At this 17. 33 U.S.C. § 905(b) (1976). 18. RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS §§ 343, 343A (1965). 19. 451 U.S. 156, 162 (1981). The standard applied by the district court was as follows: [A] shipowner is not liable for dangerous conditions created by the steve- dore's negligence while the stevedore was in exclusive control over the manner and the area of the work. nor is the shipowner under a duty to warn the stevedore or his employees of dangers or open and obvious defects which are known to the stevedore or his employees or which are so obvious and apparent that they may reasonably be expected to dis- cover them. 1976 A.M.C. 2583, 2585 (W.D. Wash. 1976), rey'd, 598 F.2d 480 (9th Cir.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Glossary of Port Industry Terminology
    Glossary of Port Industry Terminology Berth: 1) The area allotted to accommodate a vessel alongside a wharf, or the area in which a vessel swings when at anchor. 2) Or in “cruise terminology ” a bed. Berthage: A tariff charged to a vessel occupying a berth. It is calculated by applying the current tariff rate per GT for each of the first 2 twelve-hour periods. Each additional hour is charged at a lower published rate per GT. Bollard: Is a short vertical post used on a ship or a quay, principally for mooring. Breakbulk: Non-containerized general cargo. Examples include iron, steel, machinery, linerboard, woodpulp and yachts. Cabin: A passenger room onboard the cruise ship – sometimes called a stateroom or a berth. CBSA: Canada Border Services Agency (occasionally referred to as Canada Customs). Coastal Trading Act: An Act respecting the use of foreign ships and non-duty paid ships in the coasting trade. (Canadian version of American “Jones Act” see cabotage below). Cabotage Water transportation term applicable to shipments between ports of a nation; commonly refers to coastwise or intercoastal navigation or trade. Many nations, including the United States, have cabotage laws which require national flag vessels to provide domestic interport service. (In US this is referred to as the “Jones Act”). Chart Datum: A plan below which the tide will seldom fall. The Canadian Hydrographic Service has adopted the plane of Lowest Normal Tides (LNT) as chart datum. To find the depth of water, the height of tide must be added to the depth shown on the chart. Tidal heights preceded by a (-) must be subtracted from the charted depth.
    [Show full text]
  • Aaa800ews0p1260outi0june0
    Report No. AAA80 - DJ Republic of Djibouti Public Disclosure Authorized Study on regulation of private operators in the port of Djibouti Technical Assistance Final report June 2012 Middle East and North Africa Region Public Disclosure Authorized Transport Group World Bank document Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Study on regulation of private operators in the port of Djibouti Contents CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 9 REGULATION ACTION PLAN FOR PORT ACTIVITES IN DJIBOUTI ........................................ 13 REPORT 1 - DIAGNOSIS ................................................................................................................. 16 1. PORT FACILITIES AND OPERATORS ................................................................................. 17 1.1. An outstanding port and logistics hub .......................................................... 17 1.2. Doraleh oil terminal ...................................................................................... 18 1.3. Doraleh container terminal ........................................................................... 18 1.4. Djibouti container terminal ........................................................................... 19 1.5. Djibouti bulk terminal ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Stevedoring Level 1
    LEARNERS GUIDE Transport and Logistics - Stevedoring Level 1 Commonwealth of Learning (COL) Virtual University for Small States of the Commonwealth (VUSSC) Copyright The content contained in this course’s guide is available under the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike License. You are free to: Share – copy, distribute and transmit the work Remix – adapt the work. Under the following conditions: Attribution – You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Share Alike – If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same, similar or a compatible license. For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to this web page. Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder. Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the author’s moral rights. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ Commonwealth of Learning (COL) December 2009 The Commonwealth of Learning 1055 West Hastings St., Suite 1200 Vancouver BC, V6E 2E9 Canada Fax: +1 604 775-8210 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www. www.col.org/vussc Acknowledgements The VUSSC Team wishes to thank those below for their contribution to this Transport and Logistics / Stevedoring - Level 1 learners’ guide. Alexandre Alix Bastienne Seychelles, Africa Fritz H. Pinnock Jamaica, Caribbean Mohamed Liraar Maldives, Asia Ibrahim Ajugunna Jamaica, Caribbean Maxime James Antigua and Barbuda, Caribbean Griffin Royston St Kitts and Nevis, Caribbean Vilimi Vakautapola Vi Tonga, Pacific Neville Asser Mbai Namibia, Africa Kennedy Glenn Lightbourne Bahamas, Caribbean Glenward A.
    [Show full text]
  • Stevedore Fatality on Board the General Cargo Ship Weaver Arrow
    Stevedore fatality on board the Insert document title general cargo ship Weaver Arrow Locationat Newcastle, | Date New South Wales | 23 September 2012 ATSB Transport Safety Report Investigation [InsertMarine Mode]Occurrence Occurrence Investigation Investigation XX-YYYY-####296-MO-2012-010 Final – 4 June 2013 Released in accordance with section 25 of the Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003 Publishing information Published by: Australian Transport Safety Bureau Postal address: PO Box 967, Civic Square ACT 2608 Office: 62 Northbourne Avenue Canberra, Australian Capital Territory 2601 Telephone: 1800 020 616, from overseas +61 2 6257 4150 (24 hours) Accident and incident notification: 1800 011 034 (24 hours) Facsimile: 02 6247 3117, from overseas +61 2 6247 3117 Email: [email protected] Internet: www.atsb.gov.au © Commonwealth of Australia 2013 Ownership of intellectual property rights in this publication Unless otherwise noted, copyright (and any other intellectual property rights, if any) in this publication is owned by the Commonwealth of Australia. Creative Commons licence With the exception of the Coat of Arms, ATSB logo, and photos and graphics in which a third party holds copyright, this publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia licence. Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence is a standard form license agreement that allows you to copy, distribute, transmit and adapt this publication provided that you attribute the work. The ATSB’s preference is that you attribute this publication (and any material sourced from it) using the following wording: Source: Australian Transport Safety Bureau Copyright in material obtained from other agencies, private individuals or organisations, belongs to those agencies, individuals or organisations.
    [Show full text]
  • Package 'Stevedore'
    Package ‘stevedore’ January 12, 2020 Title Docker Client Version 0.9.3 Description Work with containers over the Docker API. Rather than using system calls to interact with a docker client, using the API directly means that we can receive richer information from docker. The interface in the package is automatically generated using the 'OpenAPI' (a.k.a., 'swagger') specification, and all return values are checked in order to make them type stable. License MIT + file LICENSE URL https://github.com/richfitz/stevedore BugReports https://github.com/richfitz/stevedore/issues Imports crayon, curl (>= 2.3.0), jsonlite, yaml (>= 2.1.18) Suggests knitr, openssl, redux, reticulate, rmarkdown, testthat, withr SystemRequirements docker RoxygenNote 7.0.0 VignetteBuilder knitr Encoding UTF-8 ByteCompile TRUE Language en-GB 1 2 docker_available R topics documented: docker_available . .2 docker_client . .3 docker_config_collection . .9 docker_container . 10 docker_container_collection . 19 docker_exec . 23 docker_image . 24 docker_image_collection . 27 docker_network . 31 docker_network_collection . 33 docker_node . 35 docker_node_collection . 37 docker_plugin . 38 docker_plugin_collection . 39 docker_secret_collection . 41 docker_service . 43 docker_service_collection . 44 docker_swarm_collection . 47 docker_task . 50 docker_task_collection . 51 docker_types . 52 docker_volume . 56 docker_volume_collection . 57 stevedore . 59 Index 60 docker_available Test if docker available Description Test if we can construct a docker client and confirm that we can communicate with it. This is intended to help in debug connection issues, and also for use in tests. For example, you might implement a testthat skip test that skips if stevedore::docker_available() returns FALSE to conditionally use stevedore/docker within tests. Usage docker_available(..., verbose = FALSE) Arguments ... Passed through to docker_client (e.g., api_version, host). verbose Logical, indicating if information should be printed about failures to connect.
    [Show full text]
  • Standard Operating Procedure - 002
    Standard Operating Procedure - 002 Loading and Discharging Trailers STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE - 002 COMPANY INSTRUCTION LEAFLET APPLICABILITY CONDOR OPERATIONS WITHIN PORT OF JERSEY DATE ORIGINATED 31/03/2017 CIL OWNER HEAD OF SHORE OPERATIONS REVIEW DATE DUE 31/03/2018 ORIGINATOR CONDOR / SOLENT STEVEDORE APPROVED BY RF/POM REFERENCES SAFETY IN DOCKS AND OUTLYING HARBOURS (JERSEY) CODE OF PRACTICE 2016 CONDOR FERRIES – YOUR TASK REVIEWS REASON FOR REVIEW: BY: SCS FREIGHT DIRECTOR 01/05/2018 NAME POSITION SIGNATURE DATE REASON FOR REVIEW: REMOVED BULLET 1 SECTION 2 BY: RF PORT OPS 25/04/2019 NAME POSITION SIGNATURE DATE CONTENTS Title Page Scope 3 1. Procedures 3 2. Freight Trailer Condition Reports 4 3. Towing of Trailers 5 4. Hazardous Cargo 2 STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE - 002 SCOPE: This document sets out the operating procedures used by Condor Ferries in the management of activities within Elizabeth Harbour regarding the loading and discharge of trailers during passenger and freight operations. 1. PROCEDURES Vehicle and foot passenger Check-in – Conducted by Condor Ferries Foot Passenger Embarkation – Controlled by Condor Ferries Vehicle and Marshalling/embarkation – Controlled by Condor Ferries Stevedoring Operations – Conducted by Solent Stevedores 2. FREIGHT TRAILER CONDITION REPORTS Condor Ferries will manage freight trailer condition reporting by: • Collecting inbound trailer damage reports and consignment notes from the vessel on arrival for use by the Freight Office. • The Freight Office will review the inbound damage report, inspect the trailer and record any alleged new damage including the taking of photographs. (A condition report is completed for all and every trailer arriving in to the Island.) • The Freight office will complete any required consignment notes.
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Review of Shipowner and Stevedore Liability Under the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act Edmonds V
    University of Miami Law School Institutional Repository University of Miami Inter-American Law Review 4-1-1980 Judicial Review of Shipowner and Stevedore Liability Under the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act Edmonds v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique 99 S. Ct. 2753 (1978) Alberto Mora Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.law.miami.edu/umialr Recommended Citation Alberto Mora, Judicial Review of Shipowner and Stevedore Liability Under the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act Edmonds v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique 99 S. Ct. 2753 (1978), 12 U. Miami Inter-Am. L. Rev. 487 (1980) Available at: http://repository.law.miami.edu/umialr/vol12/iss2/14 This Case Note is brought to you for free and open access by Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Miami Inter- American Law Review by an authorized administrator of Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RECENT CASE JUDICIAL REVIEW OF SHIPOWNER AND STEVEDORE LIABILITY UNDER THE LONGSHOREMEN'S AND HARBOR WORKERS' COMPENSATION ACT Edmonds v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique 99 S. Ct. 2753 (1978) The apportionment of liability in cases of tripartite litigation aris- ing from an injury to a longshoreman produced by the concurrent negligence of the shipowner and the stevedore-employer has been in dispute ever since the common law norms were partially displaced by the enactment of the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Com- pensation Act (LHWCA) of 1927,1 its 1972 Amendments, 2 and the growing acceptance of comparative negligence standards in the fields of admiralty, workmen's compensation, and tort law.
    [Show full text]
  • Terminal Operator's / Stevedore's / Wharfinger's
    Page 1 of 8 Terminal Operator’s / Stevedore’s / Wharfinger’s Legal Liability Application TERMINAL OPERATOR’S / STEVEDORE’S / WHARFINGER’S LEGAL LIABILITY POLICY APPLICATION DATE A. GENERAL INFORMATION A. Account Name Address: City / State / Country: Postal Code: Website: Phone: B. Insurance Agent or Broker: Address: City / State / Country: Postal Code: Email: Phone: C. Description of Business: Number of years in business under current management: Location of facility: Number of years at this location: Does Applicant Own or Lease facility. (Owner name if leased) Number of employees: Full Time Part Time Please attach experience of principles and senior operating personnel: Page 2 of 8 Terminal Operator’s / Stevedore’s / Wharfinger’s Legal Liability Application D. Annual Gross Receipts: Stevedore’s Wharfinger’s Total Gross Receipts Year Terminal Operations Operations Operations (All Operations) 20 20 20 20 20 E. Annual Payroll: Stevedore’s Wharfinger’s Total Gross Receipts Year Terminal Operations Operations Operations (All Operations) 20 20 20 20 20 F. Annual Tonnage / Throughput: Stevedore’s Wharfinger’s Total Gross Receipts Year Terminal Operations Operations Operations (All Operations) 20 20 20 20 20 Page 3 of 8 Terminal Operator’s / Stevedore’s / Wharfinger’s Legal Liability Application G. Adjacent Exposures Distances to Adjacent Docks and Major Waterway Constructions / Obstructions: Docks Fleeting Locations Bridges Locks Dams Other Upstream Downstream Distances to Major Shoreside Constructions / Obstructions: Chemical Plants Refineries Ferry Landings Other Upstream Downstream H. Maritime Hazards: Tidal Range Mean Water Depth Speed of Current Frequency and Severity of Flooding / High Water: Breadth of River / Channel at Location: Attach a full description of the nature and extent of all Waterborne Traffic passing the facility.
    [Show full text]
  • Index-Digest
    INDEX-DIGEST Acceptance determining lawfulness of a See Offer and Acceptance trade practice, 220; extent of re- straint, 221, nature of restraint, Ademption 223; methods used, 224; intent, See Wills 225, unique facts, 226 Administrative Law Sherman Act, enforcement of 227, Federal Bridge legislation and the 230 Constitution, see Constitutional Appeal and Error Law Admissions of evidence on appeal, Governmental resposibility in tort, 570; procedural reform in, 570; see Torts practical advantages, 570 Immunity of Commercial Vessel be- Grounds for on disobedience by jury longing to foreign government, of erroneous instruction 570 145 No separate appeal from dismissal Amiralty of equitable defense 278 Admiralty jurisdiction over suit for State appeals in Criminal Cases, 486- injury to power cable 1015 512: divergence of views on, 486; Arbitration Act, effects on, see Ar- rule on, 487; Laws governing bitration and Award time, 489; common law condition, Correction of innocent mistake in 491; reasoning against, for, 491 ; contract of 414 illogical, 493; double jeopardy Federal Bridge Legislation and the not applicable to, 496; jury of Constitution, see Constitutional peers similarly, 497; number of Law. appeals similarly, 499; hardship Limitation of Liability, retaining suit for defendent similarly, 500; after deciding on 1176 over balancing arguments for, Maritime Liens in Territorial Wat- 503; miscarriage of justice, 508; ers 1178 procedurally wise for, 507; moral Stevedore are "Seamen" within the effect of, 508; supervision of Jones Act, 414 counsel for defense by, 510; un- Wharfboat not a "vessel," within lim- prejudiced bench by, 511 ited liability statute, 415 Appointment Admissions See Powers Silence after arrest as, see Evidence.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. General Introduction Applicable to All Incoterms INCOTERM AGREED
    TRANSPORT TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1. General introduction applicable to all incoterms A. The present terms and conditions (hereafter “terms”) explain the basis on which Levantina y Asociados de Minerales, S.A. (hereafter LAM) provides transport services included in the sale of materials. B. International transport by land will be governed, except when a clause in the sales contract indicates the contrary, by the Convention on Contracts on the International Carriage of Goods by Road, signed in Geneva on 19th May 1956 (hereafter “CMR Convention ”). C. National transport by land in Spain will be governed, except when a clause in the sales con- tract indicates the contrary, by Law 15/2009 on the Contract for Transport by Road, as well as other applicable national legislation. D. Shipments for which transport has been contracted by LAM may be carried out with stops at intermediate points which LAM considers appropriate. LAM may use subcontractors to carry out the transport required. E. In the case of maritime transport, except for DAP and DDP incoterms, if the buyer aban- dons the goods at the destination port, using any of the other incotems, and this causes additional costs such as for demurrage and detention due to abandonment of the containers, etc. the buyer will bear these costs unilaterally as well as all those costs which may arise in the management of this claim. F. In no case can the client or the haulage contractor claim for shared responsibility with LAM for possible additional costs arising after the point at which the incoterms determine that the risk is transferred, except for those which arise from the failure to comply with obligations dictated by the corresponding incoterm.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendices and Acknowledgements
    APPENDIX A BACKGROUND ANALYSIS FOR WATER- DEPENDENT ACTIVITIES 191 APPENDIX B TEXT OF PROPOSITION H ORDINANCE 202 APPENDIX C GLOSSARY OF TERMS 207 APPENDIX D SEAWALL LOT/ASSESSORS BLOCK CORRELATION CHART 212 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 213 191 Appendix A Background Analysis for Water-Dependent Activities A key priority of the waterfront planning process was to ensure that ample property was reserved for the existing and future land use needs of the Port’s water-dependent activities. Water-dependent activities – those which require access to water in order to function – include cargo shipping, ship repair, passenger cruise, excursion boats and ferries, recreational boating and water activities, historic ships, fishing, and temporary and ceremonial berthing. The land use needs of these industries were determined following intensive, indus- try-by-industry evaluations and public workshops which were completed in October 1992. Approximately two-thirds of the Port’s properties were then reserved to meet the future needs of water-dependent activities. Below are brief summaries of those industries, taken from more detailed profiles prepared by Port staff, and from statements of facts and issues based on the profile reports and workshops with industry representatives. These additional documents are available from the Port of San Francisco upon request. Following the sum- maries of the industries is a brief summary of dredging and its impacts on maritime operations at the Port of San Francisco. Cargo Shipping Industry The “containerization” of cargo, whereby freight is pre-loaded into standard size boxes (as compared to “break-bulk” cargo which is freight that is made up of similar sized pieces loaded loosely or on palettes), began a revolution in shipping that has had dramatic impacts on most older waterfront cities, including San Francisco.
    [Show full text]
  • Admiralty/Maritime Law Wayne F
    Golden Gate University Law Review Volume 15 Article 5 Issue 1 Ninth Circuit Survey January 1985 Admiralty/Maritime Law Wayne F. Emard Michelle T. Leighton Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/ggulrev Part of the Admiralty Commons Recommended Citation Wayne F. Emard and Michelle T. Leighton, Admiralty/Maritime Law, 15 Golden Gate U. L. Rev. (1985). http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/ggulrev/vol15/iss1/5 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Academic Journals at GGU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Golden Gate University Law Review by an authorized administrator of GGU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Emard and Leighton: Admiralty/Maritime Law ADMIRALTY /MARITIME LAW VESSEL OWNER'S RIGHT TO RELY ON THE STEVEDORE TO PROTECT LONGSHOREMEN FROM PRE-EXISTING OBVIOUS· DANGERS: AN ANALYSIS OF THE TAYLOR and OLLESTAD DECISIONS Wayne F. Emard* I. INTRODUCTION Now over a dozen years ago, amendments to the Longshoremen and Harbor Workers' Compensa­ tion Act (LHWCA) beached the skow UNSEAWOR­ THINESS built by Sieracki, to launch a new vessel for longshoreman recovery-the clipper REASONA­ BLE CARE. Able crafters though they were, the Shipbuilders of Capitol Hill were unwilling to venture out on the waters of tort law and left the REASONABLE CARE adrift in the doldrums of vagueness, its destiny in the steady hands of its nine Supreme Pilots and its energetic (but rarely cohesive) Circuit and District crew. 'Through the Straits of De Los Santos,' was the Pilot's terse command.
    [Show full text]